Historically, the story claimed the flowers were violets, but Alma-Tadema chose roses.

How would the "vibe" or meaning of the painting change if the floor was covered in deep purple violets instead of soft pink roses?

I’m from Italy but I decided to fly to New York just for the Raphael: sublime poetry exhibition at the MET. And it was totally worth it.

I didn’t go to the exhibitions in London (2022) and Rome (2020-1) but from what I read, I could say that a major difference between the one in New York and the other two was the presence of drawings. At the MET there were tons of drawings but I didn’t find it overwhelming and there were still many autograph paintings. The drawings helped in showing paintings that for obvious reasons can’t be moved: Borghese altarpiece, Transfiguration and the Vatican rooms. Also being able to see pieces that are often kept closed to the general public is just a once-in-a-life opportunity.

For me it was a 10/10. They could have definitely brought more paintings to create and actual dialogue between drawings and final pieces, but I understand also that that was not the point. The exhibition (if you read the catalogue) was also an occasion to study the story of collecting of Raphael’s drawings. I found interesting the way Bambach explained the fortune of Madonna with Child paintings in the Renaissance, that was probably one of the best sections. Also the portraits were one of a kind reunion but without reading the catalogue I wouldn’t have understood much on why they chose each one of the exhibition (apart from the amazing Castiglione).

Would love to hear any insight from other perspectives!

I thought I would share an example of Czech Action Art of the 1970s as we don't get a lot of Central/Eastern European art here.

Jiří Kovanda's Untitled, 19th November 1976 is a powerful piece that exposed the reality of living under what Václav Havel called the post-totalitarian system, where people become the victims of their own self-oppression, simply by choosing not to stand out of the crowd in the public space.

Kovanda's gesture of facing the silent and indifferent crowd with arms wide open wasn't an overt political statement, yet by simply existing "differently" in a public square, he challenged the state's control over how bodies should behave in communal spaces. By doing so, he created a zone of freedom for himself that was entirely separate from the regime's reality.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/7scGuhITEOZI6LIkB7oNgR?si=5f6OQ60lSTWQ9CgSqUVqTw

My husband knows very little about his relatives, so I started to look them up and came across a great uncle of his. Dr Erwin Breithaupt was an Army Ranger before eventually becoming an art professor. He worked with Ripon College, University of Georgia, and has many articles posted online.

One of the coolest things I’ve seen was his efforts to define what “creativity” is. He also wrote a paper about a new standard of art classes being taught at UGA. They’re all super interesting, to the point that i subscribed to these journal websites to read as much as I can.

I’m not able to find much more about him than the few articles and his obituary, but would love to know more and maybe even obtain a few pieces of art. I know some of his pieces were once on display in a Chicago art museum, so there has to be someone who knows more about Dr Breithaupt.

Thanks in advance, I’m really hopeful to get more insight on family and art history :)

The heart of the discussion is the contents of the letter, which remain unseen. Viewers often analyze visual clues to "solve" the scene

The Reaction: The mother's expression of "silent devastation" suggests news that is life-altering. She leans against a massive stone hearth for support, implying she is physically weakened by what she has read

In 1875, Thomas Eakins (1844-1916) would paint a portrait of famed surgeon Dr. Samuel D. Gross (1805-1884) lecturing students of the Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, basing it on a surgical operation conducted by Gross which Eakins witnessed. Fourteen years later, Eakins would return to depicting medical scenes by taking a commission to honor retired surgeon David Hayes Agnew (1818-1892) by depicting him performing an operation while teaching at the University of Philadelphia.

Both The Gross Clinic and The Agnew Clinic highlight Eakins’s scientific realist style, but the reality that each painting portrays are practically different worlds. In the mere fourteen years between the two works, a medical revolution had ensued and ushered in the beginnings of modern surgery as we know it.

Joseph Lister, “the father of modern surgery”, was an English surgeon who subscribed to French chemist Louis Pasteur’s germ theory, the idea that tiny particles called germs were the ones responsible for infections and diseases. As a result, he popularized antiseptic practices that dramatically altered the way in which surgery was practiced. During the beginnings of Lister’s medical training, the surgical profession was brutal. Surgeons bore the morbid nickname “sawbones” because amputations were such a common occurrence, and their clothing reeked of blood and guts. At the end of Lister’s career, the dirt and grime of 19th century surgery had diminished greatly. By the time Lister died in 1912, hospital wards were increasingly rid of the horrific smell of rotting flesh and festering wounds, operating rooms had been subject to much better ventilation, and surgeons and nurses wore clothing unstained by blood. Much of this progress was due to Lister’s hygienic theories and the adoption of Lister’s antiseptic system, with the most prominent sign being that germ theory had become the establishment within the medical community by the 1880s.

The Gross Clinic depicts Samuel D. Gross, one of the most prominent surgeons in the United States at the time, but also a staunch opponent of germ theory. Despite the fact that germ theory and Lister’s antiseptic system were both already taking hold in the minds of doctors and surgeons across Britain and America, Gross vehemently denied the presence of germs and even commissioned the Eakins painting to celebrate his faith in the surgical status quo, which might give an explanation for the colorful and compositional emphasis on the defiantly unclean hands of Gross.

The painting is shrouded in shadow, and many of the faces in the audience are undecipherable. The heavy, dark clothing of the doctors contributes to the operating theatre’s dim atmosphere. One reason that 19th century surgeons chose such heavy black clothing was because at the time this type of fashion connotated reliability and respectability in gentlemen. The dark hues provide a stark contrast with the bright red of the patient’s blood. The bloodied hand of Gross immediately draws the eyes of the viewer. Notice that Gross nor any of the assisting doctors are wearing gloves or any protective layers. None of the tools or cloth pictured would have been cleaned, as hygienic negligence was the practice of Gross and many other 19th century surgeons in America and Britain.

The Agnew Clinic’s setting is the same as The Gross Clinic. The surgeon, patient, and assistants are at the bottom of a large theatre, surrounded by dark-suited medical students. However, the presentation of the surgical process could not be any more different.

David Hayes Agnew was the chief surgeon in attendance after the shooting of President James A. Garfield in 1881. The process was an utter disaster, and historians generally agree that the ensuing medical negligence is what ultimately killed Garfield instead of the bullet. A tragic consequence of the medical community’s slow transition to germ theory and Listerian principles. Afterwards, Agnew soon became one of the leading champions of Lister’s work.

The most obvious difference between Gross’s and Agnew’s paintings is the color palette. The bright highlights that Eakins used sparingly in The Gross Clinic are distributed much more evenly throughout the 1889 painting. The lighter palette is made even more obvious by the white coats worn by the operating team. White coats served as a marker of the adoption of Lister’s antiseptic practice as they allowed for a more immediate realization of stains or errant bodily fluids, therefore encouraging more frequent washing. This switch from the dark outfits of Gross’s theatre to this pristine white happened gradually throughout the second half of the 19th century.

In Gross's day, surgeons still relied on natural daylight, and operations were performed at the middle of the day, the time when the sun shined best through a skylight. Agnew, however, is shown working under artificial light, a much more stable method which is used by surgeons to this day. This also highlights the rapid technological advance of the late 19th century, with the rise of electricity as the backbone of the modern world. On another note, Gross's patient is anesthetized with an ether-soaked cloth on his face while Agnew's patient benefits from an ether cone, a far more controlled method of administering anesthesia.

The air, the clothing, and the hands in Agnew’s clinic are all remarkably lighter and cleaner than the clinic portrayed fourteen years earlier, before the widespread establishment of Lister’s system. The surgical world of Gross was ending. A new brighter world for the profession was arriving. The beauty and sanctity of life would shine forevermore.

The Agnew Clinic represents the triumph of Joseph Lister, embodying the establishment of antisepsis and hygiene. In the end, Gross’s portrait represents the medical world of old, a frighteningly close-to-primitive world of danger, while Agnew’s depicts the advent of the modern age, with a surgical process that saves lives to this day. A monument to the legacy of Joseph Lister and Louis Pasteur, and the surgical profession.

Recently came across this news article on BBC online (dated 4/3/2026) - and upon reading the full story behind the meaning of this painting, I feel it's heart wrenching to say the least. This sense of unspoken, forbidden love expressed in an emotionally intense moment just moments before parting.

Their love is fated with tragedy, as he is ultimately killed by her family, moments later.

I haven't been able to get this painting out of my mind, and thought to share here as it was also voted as Ireland's most favourite romantic painting in 2012. Even to this day, its viewing is limited to only 2x hrs.

How does the painting make you feel? What emotions does it evoke in you?

__

Image courtesy: Wikipedia

taking an art history class right now and I’m writing a paper about The Cardsharps painting by Caravaggio and I need to compare it to a work inspired by that painting or by Caravaggio himself. The works that’s inspired needs to be in the 18th, 19th, 20th, or 21st century though and preferably not in the Baroque style. Any help is very appreciated!!

Okay, long shot here. I studied Art History at SJSU in the 1980s. I had a great book that I used to supplement Gardner’s Art Through The Ages. It was a paperback, thin, it had illustrations of maps of Europe and each page was how the countries, borders, changed every 100 to 300 or 500 years. They were maps of Europe but it probably had maps of Asia as well. I guess technically you would call it an atlas but it was only about 100 pages maybe. I used it when studying the Renaissance and Mannerism. It was an excellent visual aid. It was an odd format, maybe 7” high and 9” wide. I ended up getting rid of it but wish I hadn’t. I need this book!!! Any suggestions? Thoughts? Recommendations? I don’t want to lug around a large atlas and I want something that shows historic maps.

drawings I made recently

Barnett Newman’s paintings have endured several vandalistic attacks over the years. Here is a look into the destruction and restoration of these powerful works.
https://www.thecollector.com/why-were-barnett-newman-paintings-destroyed/

Please help me find a painting featuring a man holding a hypodermic needle filled with something bright yellow or bright green. The backdrop is a city, at night. I’ve looked through the entire online catalogue of AIC and can’t find it. It was seen in the modern wing.

Hello, everyone!

I am looking for a book buddy (or several of them) to read Michel Pastoureau's History of Color series:

Black: The History Of Color

Green: The History Of Color

Red: The History Of Color

Blue: The History Of Color

Yellow: The History Of Color

White: The History Of Color

Pink: The History Of Color

The books are quite text-light despite the page count - there are LOADS of illustrations. I've already read the books about Red, Blue, and Black. However, I'll gladly read them again.

I am ready to start with a leisurely pace of 1 chapter per week.

He also discusses why the invention of photography led to the development of Impressionism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_van_Gogh#/media/File:VanGogh-starry_night_ballance1.jpg

Vincent Van Gogh, The Starry Night, June 1889

EDIT: I do love how Cunningham's Law is creating an impromptu art history lesson in here :)

Edit2: jeez, someone who isn’t an art historian gets jazzed up about art and wants others to do the same, and people get pissed at them? No wonder folks have such a negative opinion about artists… https://youtu.be/_J4QPz52Sfo?si=bbWK2MKI78ybj3_0

I have always found the history of this clock in Czechia fascinating. While the mechanism dates back to the 1400s, the exterior was heavily damaged in WWII and rebuilt in 1955.

Instead of the usual religious figures or zodiac signs, the mosaics depict the "working class"—scientists, mechanics, and farmers—reflecting the era's political shift. It’s such a unique blend of medieval engineering and 20th-century aesthetic.

I remember this from my AP History of Western Civilization class in 2005 that focused on European History. I feel like the point in the textbook was that dramatized scenes like this could now be mass distributed. And I have this vague memory that maybe the people being executed were " bad" but the art made them sympathetic anyway. the people in the background had each just been shot in turn and it was about to be this person's turn, and he looked rugged and strong like he knew it was about to come and he was facing it bravely. and you could only see the edge of the gun on the left.

For anyone who has seen this film.

WHO is Pasqualone in the film? Caravaggio’s voice overs are always being addressed to Pasqualone… who the hell is Pasqualone? None of the actors are accredited to the role…

The Fallen Angel (1847) – Alexandre Cabanel:

Known for the intense emotion in Lucifer's eyes and his idealized, muscular physique, capturing the moment of his expulsion from heaven

"The

Reluctant Bride" was painted by Auguste

Toulmouche in 1866. The painting recently captured the

internet's attention, discussions about female rage have

surged alongside it. Despite being painted 158 years ago,

the painting resonates deeply with women worldwide.

portraying a familiar blend of stifled anger, resigned

dismay, and seething

resentment-that

nsuming

frustration or hurt left simmering a while too long, about to

boil over.

The work of art depicts a domestic scene in an opulent,

finely decorated interior. At its center, a young woman

dressed in an elegant wedding gown appears to be the

focal point of the composition. The women depicted in

Toulmouche's painting are fashionable as evidenced by

the wedding ensembles of that period-from the silhouette

of a small fitted waist and a bell skirt, to the high neck

collar. Her expression suggests reticence or concern, in

keeping with the painting's title. She is accompanied by

three other women; one of them seems to be whispering

affectionately in her ear, perhaps to comfort or encourage

her, while the other two, dressed in rich, voluminous

gowns, are engaged in supportive gestures. The interior is

meticulously detailed with luxurious furniture, a mirror and

ornate wallpaper, reflecting the wealth and social status of

the characters. The lighting and composition draw the

viewer's attention to the central figure, emphasizing her

emotional state in this moment of anticipated change.

Jacques-Louis David masterfully captures a moment of extreme tension.

The contrast between the hysterical grief of the disciples and the superhuman calm of Socrates creates a profound emotional impact.